Adrian Bunk wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 04, 2006 at 01:45:04AM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
>   
>> ...
>> Changes since 2.6.16-mm2:
>> ...
>> +x86-clean-up-subarch-definitions.patch
>> ...
>>  x86 updates.
>> ...
>>     
>
> The following looks bogus:
>
>  config KEXEC
>         bool "kexec system call (EXPERIMENTAL)"
> -       depends on EXPERIMENTAL
> +       depends on EXPERIMENTAL && (!X86_VOYAGER && SMP)
>
> The dependencies do now say that KEXEC is only offered for machines that 
> are _both_ non-Voyager and SMP.
>
> Is the problem you wanted to express that a non-SMP Voyager config 
> didn't compile?
>   

Whoops, that should be

depends on EXPERIMENTAL && !(X86_VOYAGER && SMP)

Voyager SMP builds don't compile with kexec(), and it isn't clear how to 
shootdown CPUs using NMIs without an APIC.